Basically everything about professional sports is detrimental to long-term (or even mid-term) health, yet no-one seems to have a problem with it unless it involves "chemicals".

Is there any evidence for this? Other than possible joint pains, which are likely no worse than doing a regular factory job, and sports like NFL and fighting where hitting each other is the point, and are probably more comparable to gladiator sports than something like basketball or baseball.

I suspect the better fitnes that sports persons have in most other sports, combined with the above average income, means they almost certainly have better health than the average person, even after adjusting for the fact that they likely have better physical health genes.

Some sports.

As opposed to playing football or hockey, which is super good for your long term health!

Admittedly, those two are at an extreme in terms of destroying your body, but they're not alone. Gymnastics leaves people in rough shape in their later years. I'd imagine figure skating and tennis are also pretty hard on you too.

Sports like football and hockey would be even more dangerous if "everyone" was able to use PED's. You're just going to raise the physicality that much more.

Unless football and hockey leagues are randomly testing their athletes year-round, like the UFC does with USADA, it is very safe to assume that everybody is on steroids.

Sounds like an argument for better safety measures in those sports, not fewer.

Boxing too, was made to be more harmful long term by the introduction of safety measures (the gloves). Previously headshots were less frequent to avoid damage to the hands.

With American football there is a paradox; modern safety equipment makes the big hits possible.

Rugby and Australian rules football are good controls.